In a move that shifts the gravity of the 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports antitrust case against NASCAR to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, U.S. District Judge Kenneth D. Bell on Monday denied NASCAR’s motion to stay—pending NASCAR’s appeal to the Fourth Circuit—the injunction Bell ordered last week.
The injunction, which applies to the 2025 season unless it is vacated on appeal, blocks NASCAR from denying 23XI Racing and Front Row the same terms offered to charter teams and ensures the two teams are not compelled to release legal claims against NASCAR. In court documents, NASCAR has depicted this arrangement as unfair and unlawful since 23XI Racing and Front Row obtain a status arguably superior to those of charter teams. NASCAR’s appeal to the Fourth Circuit will continue to raise arguments that might have more traction with appellate judges than with Bell.
More from Sportico.com
The injunction also impacts 23XI Racing and Front Row’s plan to acquire charters from Stewart-Haas Racing (SHR). Bell’s order on Monday modified the injunction so that while it continues to bar NASCAR from “refusing to immediately approve” Front Row’s purchase of a charter from SHR, it no longer protects 23XI Racing’s possible purchase of a charter from SHR. The judge explained that the plaintiffs’ motion for an injunction didn’t contemplate 23XI’s purchase of an SHR charter. “While the circumstances and issues related to 23XI’s purchase of a SHR charter substantially overlap the transfer of the SHR charter to Front Row,” Bell wrote, “the situation is not entirely the same.” Bell noted that 23XI Racing, which is owned by Michael Jordan and Denny Hamlin, could separately seek an injunction to allow the purchase.
As for denying the stay, Bell wrote that “nearly all of the arguments” NASCAR raised “have already been made to the Court.” This viewpoint echoes one raised by the plaintiffs’ lead attorney, Jeffrey Kessler, in a filing earlier on Monday. Bell also objected to NASCAR writing he suffered a “misunderstanding” about the waiver provision and its relationship to the law. While NASCAR said the provision does not operate prospectively and is retroactive in effect, Bell bristled that the release “is hardly a model of clarity.” He also opined that NASCAR’s own pleadings “admit that the release is applicable to far more than ‘retrospective’ claims.”
Further, Bell underscored the “significant collateral harm” that would befall “SHR and its former employees” if he granted the stay. Bell wrote that SHR “has already announced it is closing down most of its operations” and that many of its employees have “been let go and left to join Plaintiffs.” Granting the stay, Bell worried, would cause former employees to be “thrown into limbo.”
NASCAR’s legal focus will now turn to the appeal to the Fourth Circuit. It will request the Fourth Circuit act as quickly as possible, but appeals can take many weeks or longer. Also, proceedings tend to slow down this time of the year due to the Christmas and New Year holidays, during which many judges, clerks and other court employees are away from work.
Best of Sportico.com
Sign up for Sportico’s Newsletter. For the latest news, follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.
